Karlsson Group Incorporated v. Langley Farm Investments, LLC
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Karlsson Group Incorporated (“Karlsson”) appeals the district court’s judgment in favor of Langley Farm Investments, LLC (“Langley”), Albert Van Wanger, and others in Karlsson’s diversity action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.
1. Under Arizona law, the use of a lis pendens cannot provide the basis for an abuse of process claim. Gray v. Kohlhase, 18 Ariz.App. 368 , 502 P.2d 169, 172-73 (1972). Therefore, the district court properly dismissed Karlsson’s abuse of process claim as a matter of law, because this claim was based on Langley’s use of a lis pendens. Karlsson waived its arguments justifying this claim under a theory of duress or extortion. Even if not waived, Karlsson alleges no threats that would justify an argument for duress.
2. As an essential element of an intentional interference claim, Karlsson must prove that Langley acted “improperly” by filing suit to enforce the ACRES4U contract in Arizona’s Apache County Superior Court. See Dube v. Likins, 216 Ariz. 406 , 167 P.3d 93, 100 (Ariz.Ct.App.2007). However, Arizona law also outlines that the “acted improperly” element cannot be met if Langley brought the law suit in good faith.…